I work with both of the “hate” groups named in the article, the Center for Security Policy and ACT for America. SPLC’s characterization of them is fraudulent, like most of what it does. It is thus little surprise to anyone who knows anything that SPLC recently jettisoned founder Morris Dees over accusations of racism and sexual assault.

Despite years of takedowns of SPLC’s business model from both sides of the aisle, major media companies such as Amazon, PayPal, Twitter, the Washington Post, Facebook, Google, The New York Times, and more cite them and use their determinations for business decisions such as Amazon’s nonprofit donations program. When will this ever end? How many lawsuits and lies will it take?

The SPLC’s Hate Group Definitions Are Garbage

ACT does not now, nor did it ever have, ties to any “neo-Nazi.” Both ACT and the Center are long-established organizations whose leaders and scholars seek to inform and warn America about the subversive goals of Islamic radical groups in the United States, not everyday Muslims. Everyday Muslims are often as much the victims as others.

Most of the prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are either Muslim Brotherhood (MB) fronts or tied to the Deobandi movement of South Asia (which also has ties to MB). Both are aggressive, subversive organizations that engage in terrorism throughout the world.

In the United States, they generally use subversion as a more effective strategy and have insinuated their allies and agendas into the U.S. government, media, Hollywood, public schools and universities. This is helping encourage the recent rise of anti-Semitism in the United States.

They also engage in terrorism. The 2015 San Bernardino, California attack that killed 14 and wounded 22 was carried out by followers of Deobandi. Terrorists of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas attack and murder Israeli Jews and even Arabs on an almost daily basis in the West Bank, and—note to border wall opponents—in Israel proper before Israel built its wall.

CAIR was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial and only avoided trouble because the Obama Justice Department under Eric Holder discontinued prosecutions of organizations named in the case. CAIR is also a subversive wrecking bar against the U.S. Constitution, conducting nonstop lawfare against America. CAIR’s Chicago branch—one of 27 in the United States—brags a tally of more than 5,200 lawsuits against U.S. governments.

Smearing People Is Big Business

Many of the “hate” groups on SPLC’s list are simply those it disagrees with politically. Rather than engage in legitimate debate, the SPLC seeks to destroy its political enemies with defamatory smear tactics. The Russian Communist Vladimir Lenin advocated this strategy, saying, “We must write in a language that inspires hate, revulsion, and scorn among the working class toward those who disagree with us.”

Frankfurt School Communist Herbert Marcuse developed that idea into what came to be known as “partisan tolerance”: tolerance only of leftist ideas, individuals, and groups, and a wholesale effort to discredit and silence opponents. Marcuse and other Communists worked closely for years with SPLC co-founder Julian Bond.

The SPLC regularly consorts with Communist organizations. In his pamphlet, “Rules for Radicals,” Saul Alinsky advocated the tactic of accusing opponents of hate, but SPLC was the first to institutionalize it. It has since spread far and wide, in media, universities, Hollywood, and in mindless chants of leftist protesters. Apparently now it reaches even into the editorial staff of Roll Call.

The SPLC never criticizes even the vilest leftist groups. For example, Antifa, which uses violence and increasingly expresses vitriolic, obscenity-laced hate and anti-Semitism, earns no criticism or “hate” designation from SPLC. Instead, the SPLC defends groups like Antifa against the big, bad Proud Boys!

When Occupy Wall Street Black Bloc activists attempted to bomb a bridge in Ohio and blow up the GOP convention in 2012, SPLC was asked why Black Bloc was not listed among its “hate” groups. “We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left” was the lame response.

The oldest Muslim Brotherhood front is the Muslim Students Association. It is responsible (along with the left) for the rise of anti-Semitism on college campuses. It never gets a mention by the SPLC.

There are countless other examples. The SPLC has singled out and destroyed numerous individuals and organizations using these smear tactics. It is a form of political terrorism.

SPLC’s Targets Have Begun to Fight Back

SPLC lost a $3.5 million lawsuit last year against Maajid Nawaz, a moderate Muslim the SPLC labeled an “extremist,” because he spoke out against Islamic extremism and terrorism. You literally can’t make this stuff up.

Now about 60 organizations have either sued or are considered suing the SPLC for its fraudulent smears. It’s about time. Thousands more could join in. It should be stripped of its 501(c)3 “nonpartisan” tax-exempt status and sued into penury. A dedicated prosecutor could easily make a claim that they are a continuing criminal enterprise and seize their assets under racketeering statutes.

The SPLC shows its extreme partisanship every day. Even liberals like Dana Milbank, Alexander Cockburn, and Stephen Bright have labeled the SPLC a fraud. It spends more than 20 percent of its income on fundraising and has amassed almost half a billiondollars in assets, some of which is squirreled away in overseas accounts.

Less than half of its revenues last year were needed to cover expenses, while its overtly socialist executives earn very capitalist salaries, and live like kings. Must be nice to be such conscience-free hypocrites.

Media Act as Megaphones for SPLC Smears

The Roll Call article cast both ACT and the Center as “hawks” on national defense as if that were somehow further evidence of bigotry or some other evil. That is idiotic, but “hawks” isn’t even applicable.

The Center for Security Policy staff, for example, includes former CIA officers, military and law enforcement specialists, and other national defense experts. These people take positions based on a careful evaluation of each situation, not some knee jerk “hawk” response to everything. The only knee-jerk reactions seem to be coming from the pages of Roll Call and other mainstream outlets that continue to give the SPLC credibility, like Facebook and The New York Times.

It is tragic that large outlets like these have joined the ranks of leftist smear merchants who have reduced political discourse in the United States to little more than infantile name-calling. The SPLC is one of the nastiest hate groups on the planet. It deliberately provokes division and anger in America on a daily basis to advance its extreme left agenda and rake in millions in donations.

Roll Call, Amazon, Twitter, Facebook, Google, and all the others need to drop the SPLC as a consultant on “hate” groups, but since they are all of the same stripe, they probably won’t.

Years ago, while working day shift for the Houston Police Department, one of our regular assignments was to take suspects charged with a felony offense in front of a County Court Judge to have his legal rights read to him. The jail division would have these individuals placed in the Paddy Wagon, driven across town and dropped off in front of the County Courthouse.

As a matter of historical interest, there was a safe zone for unloading prisoners in the lower level of the County Courthouse; but it was reserved for use by Harris County Sheriffs Department Officers.

Imagine if you will, unloading dangerous prisoners out of a Paddy Wagon on the street, taking the jail-issued handcuffs off and replacing them with our own handcuffs on the sidewalk and then escorting them inside the courthouse, up the elevator and into open court for the sole purpose of having them read their rights and then reversing the order to return them to the city jail. I’m not saying this was a bad idea; that would be a form of criticism directed at those who were our supervisors; no, this was a very bad idea.

So, each afternoon around lunchtime several of the police officers, including myself, would stand around waiting on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse, waiting for the Paddy Wagon to arrive. This being a regular event, we had a following of interested citizens; a polite way of saying these young women wanted to get cozy with police officers.

One fairly pushy young woman would get up close and personal with officers, handling their name tags as she read it aloud and then tried to make a big deal out of each name. She reached for my name tag and read it slowly back to me, “T.F. Stern…What’s the T.F. stand for?” she asked in a sultry voice.

I shook my head slightly, not wanting to make conversation; but instead explained, “The city got my name wrong, it should be, T.B. Stern”. I’ve no idea where these ideas come from; they just blossom and I make the best of whatever comes out.

“So then, what’s the T.B. stand for?” A couple of my fellow officers were curious, seeing as how they’d known me long enough to know I was cooking up a good one.

“Theophilus Bastardo Stern”, I responded. “Some folks call me The-old Bastard, but you can just call me Theo”. It must have worked; the woman walked away saying something insulting under her breath.

The best part about this story, from that day on, one of the officers called me Theo.

Lots to know about this U.S. citizen turned terrorist, that fought with the Taliban.

In 2001, directly after the United States went into Afghanistan, there was a nasty ground fight where the first US casualty happened. The man killed was Mike Spann, a CIA agent, and former Marine Captain.

In an area known as Mazar i Sharif, several hundred Taliban prisoners were rounded up and sequestered in Qali i Jangi. Unknown to the US forces, a pink house held a stash of weapons and Mike Spann, along with others, were interrogating the prisoners. Suddenly, an ambush took place, killing Spann but one person did not look at all like the other prisoners and that was John Walker Lindh.

As a side note, these early forces arrived on horseback.

Anyway, Lindh was born in California and after capture was convicted to 20 years in prison. During his prison stay, with the help of his father and especially his grandmother, he gained citizenship in Ireland in 2013. The plan upon his release was that he will live in Ireland… that is IF the country will accept him. That is still unknown at the point. Ireland may not provide Lindh with a passport on the grounds of being a threat to national security.

All prison records and interviews of Lindh prove he has remained an advocate for global jihad and dedicated to the fight. In 2002, the government under President GW Bush did not know exactly what to do with those caught on the battlefield and how to prosecute terrorists. It was a very new condition 18 years ago.

How did Lindh even consider Islam and this jihad adventure? Well, it began when he watched the movie ‘Malcolm X’. He was so inspired, he converted to Islam at age 17, dropped out of school and headed to Yemen to learn Arabic, all with his parents’ blessings.

He later traveled to Pakistan and joined a paramilitary group fighting for Kashmir’s independence from India. Prior to the attacks on 9/11, Lindh found his way to Afghanistan and joined the Taliban. He spent almost 2 months in a training camp near Kandahar. This camp was preparing Taliban militants and al Qaeda for terror attacks. It was here that Lindh actually met Usama bin Ladin.

After Lindh’s capture, he was eventually charged with providing material support for terrorism. He soon pleaded guilty to violating an Executive Order that prohibited aid to the Taliban and transporting weapons from Pakistan to Afghanistan.

On December 2, 2001, Lindh was transferred to American custody and he was given basic first aid and then questioned for a week at Mazari Sharif, before taking him to Camp Rhino on December 7, 2001. When Lindh arrived at Camp Rhino, his clothes were taken off and he was restrained on a stretcher, blindfolded and placed in a metal shipping container. While bound to the stretcher his picture was taken by American military personnel. While at Camp Rhino, he was heavily medicated and in severe pain from a bullet wound in his leg. On at least one occasion he was interrogated while naked. On December 8th and 9th he was interviewed by the FBI[. He was held at Camp Rhino until he was transferred to the USS Peleliu on December 14, 2001

In prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, Lindh was detained under special administrative measures, which had more restrictions for him than other inmates. In 2013, Lindh filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Prisons for the right to practice Islam prayer in a communal setting. This is part of the Islamic doctrine and Lindh won his case.

Lindh has refused to denounce his belief in Islam and refuses to condemn militancy. He has even gone so far as to advocate for the Islamic State. Lindh’s father continues to maintain his pride in his son saying that he wants to continue to help the oppressed and that if he remains in the United States after his release in May, he will be the constant victim of threats and hostilities.

We can’t know the extent of insider threats. The matter of China infecting our intelligence agencies and paying for spying continues.

Frankly, as compared to Jonathan Pollard, 180 months in prison for Hansen is hardly enough. Pollard was released after 30 years but remains on house detention. Pollard aided a steadfast ally, Israel… China is hardly a friendly country to the United States.

Anyway…

SALT LAKE CITY – A former Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) officer, taken into federal custody by the FBI in June 2018 as he was preparing to board a flight to China, pleaded guilty Friday afternoon to attempting to communicate, deliver, or transmit information involving the national defense of the United States to the People’s Republic of China.

Ron Rockwell Hansen, 59, a resident of Syracuse, Utah, entered his guilty plea before U.S. District Court Judge Dee Benson in Salt Lake City. The plea agreement includes a stipulated sentence of 180 months, subject to the approval of the Court. Sentencing in the case is set for Sept. 24, 2019, at 2 p.m.

Hansen pleaded guilty to the lead count of a 15-count indictment returned in June 2018, charging him with an attempt to gather or deliver defense information, acting as an agent of a foreign government, bulk cash smuggling, structuring monetary transactions, and smuggling goods from the United States. Federal prosecutors will ask the Court to dismiss the remaining counts of the indictment at sentencing, however, the plea agreement includes an agreement that relevant conduct can be considered by the Court in determining the reasonableness of the sentence.

Hansen retired from the U.S. Army as a Warrant Officer with a background in signals intelligence and human intelligence. He speaks fluent Mandarin-Chinese and Russian, according to court documents. Upon retiring from active duty, DIA hired Hansen as a civilian intelligence case officer in 2006. Hansen held a Top Secret clearance for many years and signed several non-disclosure agreements during his tenure at DIA and as a government contractor.

As Hansen admitted in the plea agreement, in early 2014, agents of a Chinese intelligence service targeted him for recruitment, and he began meeting with them regularly in China. During these meetings, the agents described to Hansen the type of information that would interest Chinese intelligence. Hansen stipulated that during the course of his relationship with Chinese intelligence, he received thousands of dollars in compensation for information he provided them.

Between May 24, 2016, and June 2, 2018, Hansen admitted he solicited national security information from an intelligence case officer working for the DIA. Hansen admitted knowing that the Chinese intelligence services would find the information valuable, and he agreed to act as a conduit to sell that information to the Chinese. He advised the DIA case officer how to record and transmit classified information without detection, and how to hide and launder any funds received as payment for classified information. He admitted he now understands that the DIA case officer reported his conduct to the DIA and subsequently acted as a confidential human source for the FBI.

Hansen admitted meeting with the DIA case officer on June 2, 2018, and receiving individual documents containing national defense information that he had previously solicited. The documents he received were classified. The documents included national security information related to U.S. military readiness in a particular region — information closely held by the federal government. Hansen did not possess a security clearance nor did he possess a need to know the information contained in the materials.

As a part of his plea agreement, Hansen admitted he reviewed the documents, queried the case officer about their contents, and took written notes which contained information determined to be classified. He advised the DIA case officer that he would remember most of the details about the documents he received that day and would conceal notes about the material in the text of an electronic document he would prepare at the airport before leaving for China. He admitted he intended to provide the information he received to the agents of the Chinese Intelligence Service with whom he had been meeting. He also admitted knowing that the information was to be used to the injury of the United States and to the advantage of a foreign nation.

Hansen was arrested June 2, 2018, on his way to the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in Seattle, Wash., to board a connecting flight to China.

As a part of the plea agreement, Hansen has agreed to forfeit property acquired from or traceable to his offense, including property used to facilitate the crime.

The case was handled by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Robert A. Lund, Karin Fojtik, Mark K. Vincent and Alicia Cook of the District of Utah, and Trial Attorneys Patrick T. Murphy, Matthew J. McKenzie and Adam L. Small of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section. Prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington assisted with this case.

The prosecution is the result of an investigation by special agents of the FBI, IRS-Criminal Investigation, U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Counterintelligence, and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

The Marine Corps’ top general on the west coast is readying his Marines for the next big war against a near-peer competitor, and one of his main concerns is figuring out how to alter the mindset of troops that have been fighting insurgencies since 9/11.

“If anything my problem is getting people out of the mindset of [counterterrorism] and making sure they’re thinking about near-peer adversaries in their training programs,” Lt. Gen. Joseph Osterman, commanding general of I Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Pendleton, California, told Task & Purpose in an interview on Friday.

Exercise Pacific Blitz is one program, in particular, that is currently doing just that, involving thousands of Marines, sailors, and coast guardsmen training in and around southern California.

The joint exercise not only brings together a large number of personnel but various assets as well, including Navy ships and landing craft, CH-53 helicopters, V-22 Ospreys, F-35s, and High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), a ground-based artillery system the Marines have previously test-fired from amphibious transport ships.

The bigger picture goal: Getting a large force like the 50,000-strong I MEF from sea to shore in a contested environment, described by the general in a press release as leveraging “a Marine land component as part of our larger goal of sea control.”

Osterman even said personnel were being put ashore at nearby San Clemente Island to build aircraft runways — seemingly a throwback to the Marine Corps’ island-hopping campaigns of World War II.

“It’s not part of the exercise necessarily but that’s kind of one of the things we’d have to do on these remote islands is build runways. So it’s somewhat tangentially aligned,” Osterman said. “We’re doing connector capability between islands.”

In February, Marine Commandant Gen. Robert Neller told Task & Purpose the Corps had begun to move its training to a more traditional fight instead of what grunts would face against unsophisticated enemies in the Middle East, most notably in using more advanced enemies in force-on-force training against Marines going through pre-deployment training at 29 Palms, California.

“They had aircraft. They were able to jam [communications]. We had aircraft. And we fought force on force,” Neller said on the sidelines of the 2019 West Conference in San Diego. “Marine infantry now, they’ve gotta look up” since enemies in Syria and Iraq have increasingly used unmanned aerial vehicles, and near-peers will have assets such as attack helicopters and artillery.

As Osterman explained, Marine grunts now need to learn to counter enemy drones, prepare for their GPS or communications to be jammed, and understand that enemy artillery, aircraft, or reconnaissance capabilities will be much more advanced if they’re up against an adversary like China or Russia.

“We haven’t had to worry about that for two decades,” Osterman said. “The Taliban doesn’t have any satellites up there.”

Some of Osterman’s Marines have already had a taste of that in Syria, where state and non-state actors have employed high-end anti-aircraft systems, GPS jamming technology, or hacking, for example.

“The Special Purpose [Marine Air Ground Task Force] we send to Central Command is engaged in all of that. High end, you know, kinetics in Syria, all the way down through advising the Iraqi forces. It’s one where we’ve gotta do it all, frankly.”

“Instead of having a forward operating base out there that they’re living out of and doing operations they’ve actually got to constantly be moving because if they sit too long the enemy artillery is going to take them out,” Osterman said of tactics Marines are beginning to think about. “So that gets them almost a little bit, back to [their] roots.”Read the original article on Task & Purpose.

War games are supposed to test a military’s ability to deal with the unexpected. But NATO got more than it anticipated last year when its warships’ navigation systems started acting up.

There was no way they could be where their computers were telling them they were.

This was no small issue: warships from 31 different nations were maneuvering together in what was one of NATO’s largest exercises in decades.

But the implications went far beyond safety.

It means weapon systems without alternate means of finding out where they were could end up hundreds of kilometers off course.

It wasn’t the first time this GPS ‘glitch’ had been observed in Nordic nations such as Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Civilian air traffic has reported several instances of their navigation systems going haywire.

In all, GPS signals have been reportedly disrupted five times in the northeastern region of Norway, Finland, and Sweden since autumn 2017. But the Trident Juncture exercise in October and November last year experienced the most intense attack.

Suspicion immediately fell upon Russia.

Moscow dismissed the claims.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Larov went so far as to call the allegations “fantasy.”

“Russia asked to give proof. We gave them the proof,” Norwegian Defence Minister Frank Bakke-Jensen told reporters after a bilateral meeting with Russia in Oslo.

Norwegian civilian science outposts had recorded the type, strength, and origins of the signals used to distort signals emitted by GPS satellites, he said.

This data has now been handed over to Moscow.

“Russia said ‘thank you, we will come back when our experts review that’. To have such an answer from Russia is a positive thing,” he said.

Minister Bakke-Jensen said Russia would have had to be well aware of the impact of its jamming systems.

A map provided by Norway’s intelligence service showing the source and intensity of GPS jamming signals. Picture: Norway Defence MinistrySource:Supplied

“They were exercising very close to the border and they knew this will affect areas on the other side,” he said. “We recognize Russia’s right to exercise and train its capacities [but] it is not acceptable that this kind of activity affects security in Norwegian air space.”

And international conventions dictate notice be given of any kind of major military test.

The dates and locations of NATO’s Trident Juncture exercise were known to Russia for years.

But Moscow called a snap ‘live-fire’ exercise of its own warships on the boundaries of the NATO games. It also appears to have engaged in an undeclared test of its electronic jamming systems, encompassing Trident Juncture’s designated exclusion area.

Russia shows little regard for the ‘fallout’ of its electronic warfare testing.

Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs was forced to contact Moscow in October 2017 to request jamming exercises along its border as part of Russia’s annual Zapad war-games be halted due to public safety concerns.

“It was a large military exercise by a big neighbor and it disrupted civilian activities including air traffic, shipping, and fishing,” defence minister Bakke-Jensen said at the time.

A few months ago, Vice President Pence traveled to Latin America with a specific visit to Brazil to discuss the location of a U.S. military base in Brazil. President Bolsonaro has waffled somewhat on this possibility, however, it is advancing. The mission for both the United States and Brazil is to counter China and Russia’s military influence in Latin America. Truth be told, the Brazilian military high command is against this ambition unless Russia displays further aggression.

(Ummm, they already have.)

Anyway… under the guise of a space program, the U.S. and Brazil have finalized the agreement for a U.S. space technology/military program in Alcantara, Brazil.

This will be located at the Forca Aerea Brasileira, the Brazilian Air Force base in the Alcantara Launch Center. Equatorial launches are beneficial so close to the equator due to the speed of the earth’s rotation, saving at least 30% on fuel.

Scott Pace, executive director of the US National Space Council, said on 18 March at a Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA) industry group event that the TSA could be signed later that day. The remaining hurdle is approval by Brazil’s Congress, David Logsdon, head of CompTIA’s Space Enterprise Council, told Jane’s after the event. Coincidently, Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro is in Washington to meet with US President Donald Trump.

A TSA prevents unauthorised access to and transfer of protected technologies. US companies are interested in flying out of ALC due to its location for equatorial launches. Equatorial launches are advantageous as the Earth spins the fastest at the equator, giving launches an extra boost to reach orbit.

However, ALC’s remote location poses a challenge. Flying out of ALC would require US companies to first fly into Rio de Janeiro or São Paulo before connecting to a flight to ALC, adding an extra day of travel. An industry source told Jane’s that it is still challenging for US companies to close their business case with flying out of ALC due to the distance between the two countries, corruption, Bolsonaro’s mercurial personality, and the tendency of Brazilians to run hot-and-cold when dealing with the US.

However, the source said if a company can work out the logistics and partner with an honest local broker, the 30% efficiency savings for launching that close to the equator can be a major incentive.

Brazil can currently launch small rockets from this same base for what is known as microsatellites. Brazil is investing with partners an estimated $300 billion for the joint or multi-lateral launch business. When General Mattis was still the Secretary of Defense, he signed a Space Situational Awareness agreement during his own visit to Brazil. This is an effort to do real-time tracking of other rogue satellites, data of objects in space and debris.

Not to be overlooked, both Boeing and Lockheed Martin went to the Alcantara Space Center last December along with Vector Launch, Inc. to determine costs of payloads. Brazil appears to have a new corporation called Alada and yet another named Embraer SA to advance the aerospace programs along with seeking investors.

Shadows are reflected on an American Flag as people line up to speak with Ohio Governor and Republican presidential candidate John Kasich on Feb. 11, 2016, in Myrtle Beach, S.C. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Words are weapons. In the “culture war,” words are the most powerful weapon.

Control of words is how revolutionaries get us to think a certain way—the way they wish us to think.

Early 20th-century Italian Communist Party leader and leading “cultural warrior” Antonio Gramsci put it this way: “Ideas and opinions are not spontaneously ‘born’ in each individual brain: they have had a center of formation, or irradiation, of dissemination, of persuasion—a group of men, or a single individual even, which has developed them and presented them in the political form of current reality.”

“As early as 1903, at a party congress, Lenin won a membership issue by a single vote. But from then on, he called his faction ‘the Bolsheviks,’ or majoritarians, and his opponents ‘Mensheviks,’ or minoritarians. It didn’t matter that the Bolsheviks never were a true majority among Russia’s revolutionaries; what mattered was the perception of power.

“Lenin repeated the tactic by dubbing Bolsheviks ‘Reds’ to signal an affinity with the bloody violence of the French Revolution, while their battlefield opponents were saddled with ‘Whites’ to link them with the discredited French Bourbon dynasty. Lenin also took title to the word ‘democracy,’ disarming opponents who were then unable to project a coherent message. By controlling words, Lenin controlled perceptions of reality.”

Why, then, do freedom fighters and anti-communists persistently use the words of our enemies to our own disadvantage?

Why do we define ourselves using our opponents’ terms? Why do we label the enemy in their own terms, not ours?

To win the war, we must control the language. We can’t set the terms of battle while using the language of the enemy against our own best interests.

Here are five words that I believe we should stop using. They are all tainted and inaccurate. They have all been weaponized against us.

Conservative

Conservative has become almost synonymous with “fascist” in modern America. Once it meant to “conserve” the Constitution, American values, and the American way of life. Today, to much of America, it means someone who supports the status quo and big business, maybe even a reactionary, a racist, or a “white supremacist.”

Socialism has advanced so far in America that the only thing “conservatives” usually end up conserving is big government. In my home country of New Zealand, “conservatives” oppose selling off state-run businesses. They want to “conserve” state control! We even hear of “conservative” old guard communists in China and Russia trying to preserve “traditional” socialism.

Let’s abandon the word. It’s a terrible word for attracting young people to the liberty movement. Until we can come up with something better, let’s use “Constitutionalist.” It’s a little clumsy, but it’s accurate and seizes the moral high ground. It’s also hard to attack. Who wants to be identified as an anti-Constitutionalist?

Capitalism/Capitalist

To most Constitutionalists, capitalism and capitalist mean supporting business, industry, and the American Way. To socialists and most young Americans, these words mean heartless multinational corporations seeking profit at all costs and degrading the environment. Capital means money, huge wealth, and extravagance to most young people. It’s no longer understood as intellectual or material property used to produce wealth for all.

The word “capitalism” has been around since the 16th century but was popularized in the 19th century by French socialist Louis Blanc and the founders of “communism”: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. “Capitalism” is essentially a Marxist word that our enemies use to beat us with.

Let’s resurrect “free enterprise.” It’s accurate, it’s idealistic, and it’s dynamic. When people hear the words “free enterprise,” they don’t think of faceless mega-bankers and Wall Street hustlers. “Free enterprise” conjures up images of young entrepreneurs taking on the world, family farms, and mom and pop stores. Most Americans believe in “free enterprise,” not so much in “capitalism.”

Democracy

The United States is not and never has been a “democracy,” although you wouldn’t know that from watching Fox News or most Democratic and many Republican Party politicians.

The United States of America is a “republic,” derived from the Latin “res publica”—the “people’s thing.”

Democracy means simply the will of the majority. The Founding Fathers were scholars of history. They knew that “majority rule” would inevitably lead to tyranny. Rights that are subject only to the whim of 50 percent plus one, are no rights at all.

The Founding Fathers designed a far superior system: the “constitutional republic.” Rights were to be enshrined in law and protected by a written constitution that would be protected from the tyranny of the majority—or “mob rule.” Some elements of “democracy” were incorporated into the system, to elect public officials and later to vote on ballot measures, but the fundamental rights of the people were seen as coming from God, never to be subjected to the popular vote.

A republic is far superior to a democracy in that it uses checks and balances to protect individual liberties against oppression from any quarter—including majorities.

The United States is a “republic.” We should always use that term. Never should we play into our enemies’ hands by downgrading this nation to “democracy” status.

Liberal

The Green New Deal isn’t a “liberal” proposal—it is socialist. The $15-per-hour minimum wage is not a liberal measure—it comes directly from the Democratic Socialists of America and the Communist Party USA. Antifa isn’t a “liberal” group, as Fox News often labels it—it’s communist/anarchist. Socialist groups regularly label their opposition fascists, Nazis, and white supremacists. We call them “liberal.” Socialist is the appropriate label.

Almost every policy coming out of today’s Democratic Party is demonstrably socialist. Most of the “liberal” commentators we see on TV are in fact, socialists. The word “liberal” is far too kind and no longer accurate. Let’s call socialists socialists. No more giving them a respectability they don’t deserve.

Progressive

The currently fashionable word “progressive” has partially replaced “liberal” as a euphemism for socialist. There is, however, a subtle difference. “Progressive,” in its current usage, came out of the socialist and communist movements of the 20th century. According to Marxist theory, humanity is slowly and inevitably “progressing” toward communism. Therefore, anyone assisting this historical process was, by definition, a “progressive.”

“Progressive” was used by Marxists as a code word. Put “progressive” into an organization’s name and all the comrades would know it was communist, even if the general public didn’t. Former communist David Horowitz was active in the Sunnyside Young Progressives as a teenager. In the 1950s, the Communist Party of New Zealand’s junior wing was known as the Progressive Youth League. “Progressive” also was used to identify friends and allies in the movement. “She’s a good progressive” didn’t necessarily mean the woman in question was a Communist Party member, but that she was at least working in the interests of the movement.

Never should we talk about “progressives.” These people and the movements they promote are working, whether they acknowledge it or not, to advance communism. “Progressives” are, whether they know it or not, Marxists. That’s how they should be labeled: Marxists promoting Marxist ideas.

President Donald Trump has shown us how to use weaponized words like no other president in generations. Who can forget “Lyin’ Hillary” (Hillary Clinton), “Low-energy Jeb” (Jeb Bush), “Pocahontas” (Sen. Elizabeth Warren), or his masterful use of “fake news,” which drives the liberal—whoops, I mean socialist—media nuts.

In his 2019 State of the Union speech, Trump didn’t attack “liberalism” or “progressivism”; he specifically and accurately attacked “socialism.”

We all need to follow the president’s example. We must stop using the enemy’s lexicon. Any good duelist understands that he who chooses the weaponry has the advantage.

Let’s stop using the weapons our enemy chooses for us. We are in a fight for the survival of our civilization. This is a life-or-death battle between good and evil. Let’s choose our own weapons of war and fight this war to win it.

Trevor Loudon is an author, filmmaker, and public speaker from New Zealand. For more than 30 years, he has researched radical left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics.

Watching Beto O’Rourke announce his candidacy for president, I had snake oil salesmen come to mind. Everything about this guy is fake, which makes him a perfect candidate for fake news media to celebrate.

My wife Mary and I spent several weeks in Texas campaigning for Ted Cruz, fighting to stop O’Rourke from stealing Cruz’s Senate seat. It was incredible watching O’Rourke’s TV ads. Funded with mega-millions from outsiders, O’Rourke’s entire U.S. Senate campaign was built upon deceiving voters.

For example: While claiming to be pro-Second Amendment, great deceiver O’Rourke voted against every piece of pro-gun legislation that came to his desk. To deceive voters into believing he is a regular guy, millionaire O’Rourke posted a video of himself in a laundromat doing laundry. O’Rourke came disturbingly close to scamming Texans into electing him over Ted Cruz.

In his elect-me-or-we’re-all-gonna-die presidential campaign announcement, O’Rourke claimed there are crises in our economy, democracy, and climate. O’Rourke urgently warned Americans that we are in a “moment of peril.” What on Earth is O’Rourke talking about?

Our Economy: Trump has our economy booming. Black unemployment is the lowest in recorded history. Hispanics and women are also doing great in Trump’s economy.

Our Democracy: Mr. O’Rourke, the truth is, you and your fellow Democrats are the greatest threats to our democracy. Democrats seek to criminalize conservative thoughts, conservative speech, and gun ownership. Given their vindictive destruction of Mike Flynn and Paul Manafort, Democrats outrageously seek to criminalize working for Trump.

Our Climate: For the gazillionth time, man-made climate change is a proven hoax. O’Rourke passionately warns that not embracing the Green New Deal will lead to the extinction of the human race in a decade or so. Here’s a reminder of the insanity in the Green New Deal. By 2030, we must end air travel; end the use of fossil fuels; mandate that every new job be unionized; decommission every nuclear plant; rebuild every building in America for state-of-the-art energy efficiency; and let the government fund everyone, including deadbeats who refuse to work.

O’Rourke continued his trademark deception tactic. He said we should ensure immigrants “lawful paths to work.” Wait a minute, dude. You and your fellow Democrats say screw our immigration laws; let’s roll out the red carpet for illegals. Democrats say because we have pillaged the world’s resources and because we are racist, sexist, and homophobic, we do not have the moral authority to keep anyone out of our country. Not only is O’Rourke fighting to stop Trump from building a border wall to keep Americans safe, but he wants to tear down the existing border wall in El Paso, Texas.

O’Rourke said we should “listen to and lift up rural America.” The truth is, O’Rourke and his fellow Democrats despise rural America. Rural Americans voted for Trump, desire to keep their guns, attend Christian churches on Sundays, believe that marriage is between one man and one woman, and believe that abortion and infanticide are evil. Pandering to rural America is simply more of O’Rourke’s campaign of deception.

As a black American, I was stunned when O’Rourke said we should “confront the hard truths of slavery, and segregation, and suppression in these United States of America.” What the heck is he talking about? Ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865 ended slavery in America. The only segregation I am aware of is black students segregating themselves on college campuses, demanding black student unions and race-based housing facilities. Who are the masses of Americans O’Rourke claims we are suppressing? Do you see O’Rourke using Democrats’ disgusting tactic of dividing Americans into bogus victimized voting blocs?

After spewing gloom and doom, America-sucks, and everyone-is-a-victim lies, O’Rourke had the audacity to say, “This is going to be a positive campaign.” I laughed out loud.

O’Rourke is anti-law enforcement, voting against ICE. He calls our nation’s police “the new Jim Crow,” which cruelly paints targets on the backs of our brave men and women in blue to be assassinated by Black Lives Matter.

Kate Steinle was shot and killed by an illegal alien who was deported several times and kept coming back to his sanctuary city, San Francisco. Kate’s Law would give mandatory jail time to illegals who repeatedly break our immigration laws. O’Rourke voted against Kate’s Law. Supposed man of the people O’Rourke voted against Trump’s tax cuts. O’Rourke wants single-payer health care, which leads to rationed health care, where the government makes funding decisions, determining who lives and who dies.

While in Texas campaigning for Ted Cruz, I got to witness O’Rourke’s deceptive tactics up close when he ran for U.S. Senate. My brother and sister fellow Americans, our country deserves much better than sociopath conman Beto O’Rourke.

Ah yes… Goebbels, the Minister of Propaganda for Nazi, Germany from 1933 to 1945. His job was to only present favorable stories for a positive image of the regime and to spread hatred of the Jews. He used radio, literature, music, textbooks, printed posters/newspapers and theater to display the propaganda. He too was responsible for burning books… beginning to sound familiar?

Media and Marxist activist groups in the United States are all pounding the same drumbeat that is pro-socialism, applies to parts of stories and is intent on holding others accountable that don’t fit the agenda.

Can you count the ways this is done using the methods and media outlets like the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC and those pesky websites like Media Matters?

Well, when Reuters reports on Reuters… take notice. Senator Cruz took notice.

So Reuters had evidence in 2017 that Beto may have committed multiple felonies—which Beto confirmed on the record—but deliberately withheld the story for over a year to help him win his Senate race? But when he’s running against Bernie etc, NOW it’s news? https://t.co/dUfrRPw1By

So, the Reuters backstory goes like this… even their summary is lacking but try it on for size anyway.

(When Reuters held the story, obviously people still had not read it when they did publish it as Beto was able to raise $6.1 million in the first 24 hours of his campaign announcement. He beat Bernie and all the other 2020 contenders…..sigh.)

Maybe it is just cool to campaign on a restaurant counter.

Or to skateboard onto a stage.

Presidential?

(Reuters) – Reuters reporter Joseph Menn exclusively revealed on Friday that Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke belonged to one of the best-known groups of computer hackers as a teenager.

Within minutes, his special report was the most popular story on Reuters.com here and was picked up by other news outlets. But the origin of the story goes back more than two years.

Members of the group, which calls itself Cult of the Dead Cow, protected O’Rourke’s secret for decades, reluctant to compromise the former Texas Congressman’s political career.

After more than a year of reporting, Menn persuaded O’Rourke to talk on the record. In an interview in late 2017, O’Rourke acknowledged that he was a member of the group, on the understanding that the information would not be made public until after his Senate race against Ted Cruz in November 2018.

In an interview with Reuters senior producer Jane Lee, Menn explains how he broke the story and got O’Rourke to open up about his hacking days.

“I decided to write a book about the Cult of the Dead Cow because they were the most interesting and influential hacking group in history. They illustrated a lot of the things that I think are fascinating about hacking and security work. Focus on Trump’s speech after [his] attack on Muslims.

“While I was looking into the Cult of the Dead Cow, I found out that they had a member who was sitting in Congress. I didn’t know which one. But I knew that they had a member of Congress.

“And then I figured out which one it was. And the members of the group wouldn’t talk to me about who it was. They wouldn’t confirm that it was this person unless I promised that I wouldn’t write about it until after the November election. That’s because the member of Congress had decided to run for Senate. Beto O’Rourke is who it was.

“I met Beto O’Rourke. I said ‘I’m writing a book about Cult of the Dead Cow, I think it’s really interesting. I know you were in this group. This book is going to publish after November and your Senate race is over. And he said, ‘OK.’